The Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench, has held that a Family Court could not deny a wife maintenance under Section 125 CrPC merely because her claim for permanent alimony had been rejected in the divorce case or because she holds an M.A. degree, and has directed her husband to pay Rs 5,000 a month from the date of her petition.
Dharwad: The Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench, has set aside a Family Court’s refusal to grant maintenance to a wife under Section 125 of the CrPC, holding that her claim could not be rejected merely because her request for permanent alimony had been turned down in the divorce proceedings, or because she holds an M.A. degree, and has directed her husband to pay her Rs 5,000 per month [Sujata and Another v. Rajesh].
Dr. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha passed the order on August 24, 2026 in Rev. Pet. Family Court No. 100065 of 2025, filed by the wife and the couple’s minor son against the order of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hubballi, dated December 5, 2024 in Crl.Misc. No. 374 of 2021.
The case
The wife and son had sought Rs 20,000 and Rs 10,000 a month respectively from the husband under Section 125 CrPC. The Family Court directed the husband to pay Rs 5,000 a month for the son and rejected the wife’s claim. Her counsel argued that she was harassed and subjected to cruelty, started living separately with the son, has no source of livelihood, and that the Family Court rejected her claim only because her claim for permanent alimony had been rejected in the divorce case.
The husband’s counsel said he works as an Assistant Accountant in a private company and earns Rs 29,000 a month, that he has to support his parents and a brother with a mental illness, that he is already paying Rs 5,000 for the son so that nothing is left for the wife, and that she is an M.A. graduate who can maintain herself. The allegations of cruelty are the wife’s and were not tested in this order.
ALSO READ: A Highly Qualified Wife, If Not Working, Cannot Be Denied Maintenance: Kerala High Court
The Court’s reasoning
The Court noted from the Family Court’s order of April 12, 2023 in M.C. 379/2019, whose genuineness was not disputed, that the wife had sought divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion under Sections 13(1)(a) and 13(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act and Rs 10 lakh as permanent alimony, and that the Family Court held her entitled to divorce. Her request for permanent alimony was rejected only because she had not proved the husband’s income or that he could pay Rs 10 lakh. The Court said no finding was given that she was not entitled to any permanent alimony, and that the claim failed only for want of proof of his financial status.
The Court held that the Family Court ought not to have rejected her maintenance claim on that basis. It noted that it was not even the husband’s case that the wife is a working woman, and that she cannot be denied maintenance merely because she holds an M.A. degree. Since the husband failed to establish that she can support herself through her own earnings, it held that he is liable to maintain her.
The amount
On the quantum, the Court noted that the petitioners had produced no substantive proof of the husband’s financial status, while his own counsel had stated that he earns Rs 29,000 a month. It said the husband’s plea that he must support his family, including a brother with a mental illness, was not backed by any material on the brother’s health before the Family Court. Taking into account his income and the Rs 5,000 already awarded for the son, it considered it desirable to direct him to pay the wife Rs 5,000 a month as well, and found the amount awarded for the son justifiable, so that no interference was needed on that part.
The order
The revision petition was allowed. The husband was directed to pay the wife Rs 5,000 a month from the date of filing of Crl.Misc. No. 374/2021, for her lifetime or until she becomes disentitled to maintenance, and to clear all arrears within five months.
Why it matters
The order separates the two remedies. Permanent alimony refused in a divorce case for want of proof of the husband’s means is not a finding that the wife is not entitled to maintenance, and Section 125 maintenance cannot be refused on that basis or on her degree alone. It also notes that the burden is on the husband to show she can support herself.
The amount rests on the husband’s admitted salary and the sum already awarded for the son, and the Court did not go into the merits of the cruelty allegations. Whether the maintenance can later be varied will depend on any change in the parties’ circumstances.
Case Title: Sujata and Another v. Rajesh [Rev. Pet. Family Court No. 100065 of 2025]
Bench: Dr. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha, Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench
Date of Order: August 24, 2026
Appearances: Advocate Prashant S. Kadadevar appeared for the petitioners, and Advocate Amruth V. Jois appeared for the respondent, both by video conference.